Tips that help take bullet jump out of the accuracy equation. Find out how!

This is an aluminum staub cut with a chamber reamer. It’s easy to see the transition to the lands. The more smoothly a bullet enters the lands, the better it will shoot. When seating depth can’t be idealized, choosing a “gentle” bullet is the best defense against ill effects of jump.

Glen Zediker

Last time I shared some insight about bullet “jump,” and specifically with respect to the viability of setting up a “zero-jump” chamber/ammo combination.

To hit the highlights: Jump is the gap the bullet must traverse when it leaves the case neck to engage the lands or rifling. Generally, best (and better) accuracy comes with this gap is reduced to a minimum amount, or at the least reduced. Better is better.

To go farther into this topic, it’s worthwhile to move the bullet around, seating it more or less deeply (nearer or farther from the lands at rest) to maximize accuracy. Clearly, there’s a limit on cartridge overall length if the rounds have to fit into a magazine box so they can feed right. In NRA High Power Rifle competition, the AR15 pilots are specifically not allowed to have the rounds feed from the magazine in semi-auto mode; each round must be loaded into the chamber one at a time for the “slow-fire” segments, which includes the 600-yard event. That means competitive High Power shooters using AR-platform rifles are free to move the extra-long 80+ grain .224-caliber bullets out to near or on the lands when chambered. That doesn’t really matter but it explains the popular “Wylde” chamber we tend to use. It’s got a long enough throat to free more case volume and also provide a bigger “expansion chamber” for burning propellant gases, but it’s not as long as a NATO-spec so should perform better with bullets that do have to be loaded deeply in enough to fit the magazine box. Something like a Sierra 80gr or 82gr Berger won’t usually shoot worth a flip loaded to mag-length. That bullet, and others similar, are simply too dang long for a .223 Remington case. A huge amount of the bullet swallows up the case interior.

Sierra bullets compared.
It’s not all in the ogive specs, but it’s influenced by it, because those specs influence the overall profile of the bullet. Here’s a .224 Sierra 77gr MatchKing next to an 80gr MatchKing. The first is approximately 8 calibers, the 80 is approximately 12. The marks indicate the location of the first point of coincidence of land diameter. Considering the overall profile differences, it’s pretty clear that the 77 jumps with better results when each is loaded to the same cartridge overall length. There’s just 3grs difference in these bullets but they’re worlds apart in both tolerance and performance.

The best defense against ever worrying over jump, meaning whether you’re getting good accuracy regardless of the amount of bullet jump (well, at least within reason…) is bullet choice. Specifically, a tangent-profile bullet with a conservative ogive. Recollecting from some materials I did a while back, a “secant” profile is a sharper taper-in from bullet body to bullet tip; a tangent is a smoother transition. Secants, more or less, have a “shoulder” indicating a more abrupt taper rather than a smooth arc. For examples: true VLD (very low drag) and the Hornady A-Max are secant.

Bullets with relatively shorter nosecones and relatively longer bearing areas (length of the bullet that’s in contact with the rifling) are likewise more tolerant of jump.

Sierra 69, JLK 70 VLD
Here’s an example of different .224 bullet profiles at essentially the same weight. A Sierra 69gr MatchKing on left and a JLK 70gr VLD. The tangent 8-caliber-ogive (approximate) Sierra shoots great when it’s jumping; the secant 15-caliber-ogive VLD tends not to shoot well at all unless it starts touching the lands.

There’s been a trend for many years now toward creating bullets with higher ballistic coefficients. Worthwhile pursuit! Only issue is that when a bullet design features better aerodynamics, the features of that are, yep, longer nosecones with shallower angles. The ogive (what I’ve been more descriptively calling the nosecone because it’s easier to picture) usually is expressed in calibers. Technically it’s “calibers of ogive,” and that’s the ogive radius divided by the caliber. To me it’s easier to picture looking at the “other side” of the equation: the arc that scribes the profile in multiples of the bullet’s caliber. So, a 7- to 8-caliber ogive is a tighter circle (more rounded profile) than a 12- or 15-caliber ogive. Most of the “high-BC” profiles use a 15, some more. In other words, they’re stilettos.

Here’s an illustration of calibers-of-ogive from Sierra. That transition area from bullet diameter to first point of contact with the lands (which will be land diameter, and at least 0.005 smaller) has influence on how well a bullet endures jump. A lower-number is favorable in this regard. In this illustration the ogive radius, 2.240 inches, divided by the caliber, 0.308, gives 7.27. That should tolerate jump well.

I’m kind of breaking this down farther and faster than exercising good technical care in covering this topic should warrant, but: comparing both same-weight and same-caliber bullets, the longer it is the more sensitive it’s going to be to jump.

I have shot way too many high-X-count 300-yard cleans with bullets jumping 0.030+ inches to say that it’s not possible to have good accuracy unless jump is minimal. I admit that’s only a 1 moa group. I’m also using what some makers call a “length-tolerant” bullet, and specifically that’s a 77gr Sierra Matchking, and the same goes for a Nosler 77 or Hornady 75 HPBT (not A-Max). It’s the bullet form, not just its weight, that has the strongest influence on all this.

So, do you have to abandon better ballistics to attain better accuracy? Maybe. At least to a point. With the smaller calibers, which don’t have other advantages larger calibers have simply by virtue of weight and sectional density, there tends to be an effectively greater discrepancy between the lighter and heavier (again, it’s really shorter and longer) bullet ballistic performances.

A rifle with a generous-length magazine box provides greater jump-reduction via loaded round architecture. If there’s enough room, a bullet can be scooted out to the limit of the space within the box.

As always, well at least usually, there are tools! Get them and use them. A gage “set” from Hornady is well advised. There are others similar. I’ve been using their LNL Overall Length Gage and Bullet Comparator for many years and receive needed results. The first tool indicates the seating depth that touches the lands, and the second provides more reliable and accurate means to measure and record it.

Hornady LNL gage
This Hornady LNL gage pair gives you the tools needed to determine the jump you’re getting with the bullet you’re using. Check it out HERE

The leade, which, again, is the transition to the lands and determined by the chambering reamer (or throating reamer if custom-done) does influence tolerance for jump. The shallower the angle the better, but, that’s a two-edged issue. Take a commonly-used 3-degree leade and make it a more preferable 1.5-degree leade and that takes way on more than double the distance (length of cut) to attain. Again, when there’s a magazine getting in the way of bullet seating depth flexibility, a shallower leade eases transition into the barrel bore for a jumping bullet, but also increases jump. There are some cartridges, like David Tubb’s 6XC, that were designed specifically to “perfect” all these relationships: magazine-mandated cartridge overall length, bullet choice, and leade in, and it’s one reason it owns the records it does. Otherwise, it’s often a compromise… But don’t compromise accuracy for anything. A smaller group is, in the long run, the best defense against both wind and distance when it comes to hitting a target. Reliable feedback equals correct adjustments.

The preceding was adapted from Glen’s newest book, Top-Grade Ammo, available here at Midsouth. For more information on this book, and others, plus articles and information for download, visit


7 thoughts on “RELOADERS CORNER: Bullet Jump 2”

  1. Excellent presentation, as always. I highly recommend your book “Top Grade Ammo”. A reloaders must have!

  2. Mr. Zediker,
    I have been critical of some of your tomes, but you have raised the bar here. I get questions about “jump” all the time. This article is superb. It answers most if not all those questions with clarity.

    Why the extra long jump in the 5.56 NATO chamber/ round architecture is another interesting question which you may want to explore at another time. The answer is somewhat obscured in the antiquity of 5.56 MIL development.


  3. Thought I have read about using a parallel throat that then minimized or eliminate concerns of lead angle rather that’s 1.5 or 3. I am sure that I read that a parallel throat is what gives the 308 Norma mag it’s claimed accuracy edge.

  4. A really excellent, well-constructed article. Bench rest shooters have found that just a half-thousands adjustment or much less has made the difference between the thrill of victory and agony of defeat to steal a line. Now with the non-lead requirements coming in many states, maintaining match accuracy is seemingly impossible and overly frustrating with many of the varying bullets offered in that line. It’s a whole different game with bullet jump there. Perhaps a future article can be created for that growing group.

  5. Unfortunately I am not a hand-loader therefore I must for now depend upon the most consistent quality match ammo available. But I’d love too… but lacking space I do not. Having home without a garage and very humid basement.
    Can you address the best ways to overcome space limitations, humidity, temperature and/or elevation effects on the loading process and the finished cartridge.
    Would a better redesigned of the chamber area where the case neck seats address the problems surrounding jump?
    That is fully understanding that more specificity in barrel and cartridge production does raise costs to the End User.

Comments are closed.